Ho Kwon Ping is the founder of Banyan Tree Holdings, a prestigious brand of hotels catering to the wealthy. He was also the founding Chairman of the Singapore Management University (SMU). In 2011, he was voted top Thinker in Singapore in the Yahoo! Singapore 9 Awards, a testament to his business innovations and leadership in civic causes.

"Some Day", article for Pink Dot[]

Responding to an invitation by Pink Dot, Ho wrote an op-ed article entitled, "Some Day" which was published on Pink Dot's website on 26 June 2012[1]:

"The words “some day” resonate with many people of my generation. They were the final words of the refrain from the song “We Shall Overcome” which marked the civil rights movement of America in the 1960’s and ‘70s. As a wide-eyed freshman in the US I attended student rallies and demonstrations, and I still recall the poignant, hopeful idealism of many young people, black and white, as they sang, arms linked and waiting for that “some day”.

For my parents’ generation, “some day” was a longing for a future when they would control their own destinies free from colonial masters; for freedom from poverty, hunger, illiteracy. The PAP when it came to power delivered on all its promises – and more – and “some day” became today. Basic civil rights – equality of gender, race, and religion – became such a reality that for most of our younger generation, “some day” as an expression of hope, has little meaning since they have not had need to hope. Not having to yearn for a distant and perhaps unreachable future is a blessing our prosperity and security has given to younger people today.

But there is still a group of ordinary Singaporeans, of different races, religion, and gender, for whom “some day” remains elusive, distant, and yet fervently yearned for.

These are the people whose identities have become marginalized at worst and unclear at best, because of their sexual orientation. Once labeled pejoratively “homosexual”, then “gay”, and now for the politically correct — LGBT ( lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender ) – men and women who happen to love and desire others of their same gender, have yet to become just ordinary people in the eyes of society as they pursue their love lives. Worse, sex between males remains a criminal activity – though the government has declared that it will not enforce the law.

The rationale for not simply decriminalizing Section 377A is presumably the social conservatism of the very religious Singaporeans – whether Christian, Muslim, or Hindu. Whether there will indeed be a groundswell of anger if Section 377A is repealed or not, I do not know. We still do not have polls which can accurately survey public opinion. As to whether public opinion should even be the basis for discrimination against people is another matter altogether.

In some other societies, not being of the majority race or religion was reason enough to be an outcast – itself the start of the slippery slope to legal and institutionalized discrimination.Thankfully, in Singapore we have embraced diversity as the foundation of our social cohesion, so it is unimaginable to us that people of a different race or religion can be legally discriminated against. How then do we justify the discrimination of people with a different sexual orientation?

I still recall when as a child, I was scolded and discriminated against in school because I was left-handed. My teacher thankfully, made a cursory attempt to make me right-handed, then gave up and accepted my deviancy. Today, being left-handed is so normal that no one even gives it a second thought.

The point is, as societies mature and progress, what was previously considered deviant behavior generally becomes part of a larger “normal”. This is after all, the vision behind an inclusive society. Inclusive across different religions and races, and yes, even between people of different sexual orientation.

The Government has recently created the vision of an inclusive society as the basis of its programs. This is a very timely and relevant vision: during decades of impressive economic growth, segments of Singapore society have not enjoyed the fruits of development as others. But diversity and inclusiveness is not just about income levels.

Nor is it just about tolerance. Instead, it is recognizing that not only should we be tolerant of those who are different from us, but indeed, that having a high level of diversity is a more positive assurance of creative continuation than unrelenting homogeneity.

It is about celebrating, as we do in the culture of Singapore Management University and Banyan Tree group, the very differences in our colleagues and stakeholders, which makes us stronger.

Long ago, my left-handedness made me a deviant in school. Today, our society accepts LGBT people as part of our social fabric. Perhaps gay love will even be decriminalized. Some day..."

"Revisiting Some Day", article for Pink Dot's tenth edition[]

Again responding to an invitation from Pink Dot, Ho penned the following article entitled, Revisiting Some Day" in support of the tenth edition of Pink Dot and the Red Dot for Pink Dot sponsorship drive which was published on Pink Dot's website on 11 April 2018[2]:

"I was recently asked by the founders of the Pink Dot movement to write something to commemorate the tenth edition of Pink Dot.

It was six years ago that I wrote Some Day, a short essay on the gay rights movement in Singapore. I related it to my own experience with the civil rights movement in America in the 1960s, when I was a student at Stanford University, and the refrain “Some Day” was a rallying cry to change the world. I expressed my hope that someday, Section 377A will be repealed and gay sex between consenting men will be decriminalised.

Well, six years on, Some Day remains elusive. Arguably, social space for the LGBTQ community in Singapore has not narrowed; the rapid integration of their counterparts all over the world with the rest of their societies has inevitably rubbed off, no matter how slightly, into Singapore society. But there is not much else to cheer the LGBTQ community here. Witness these examples:

LGBTQ organisations cannot register as a society or company because they are considered “likely to be used for unlawful purposes” and/or “contrary to the national interest” under the Societies Act and Companies Act. LGBTQ organisations are thus not able to obtain licenses or IPC status, making fundraising extremely difficult.
IMDA’s broadcast and publishing codes prohibit content which “promotes or glamourises the homosexual lifestyle”. This means positive (or even neutral) portrayals of LGBTQ people are prohibited. Healthcare services providers are affected by this too, as they cannot run campaigns to meet the needs of the community.
All these and other anti-LGBTQ guidelines result inevitably in official-dom having to support even quite silly complaints from anti-gay hate groups. For example, in 2014, acting on a complaint, NLB’s initial response was that it would pulp two children’s books which told stories of LGBTQ families. In 2016, a member of one of the more vocal hate groups “We are against Pink Dot in Singapore” (WAAPD) complained about a scene in the ‘Les Misérables’ musical where two men shared a quick kiss. IMDA ordered that scene to be cut. In 2017, WAAPD complained to the police and the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (ASAS) about the advertisements that Pink Dot had put up at Cathay Cineleisure. ASAS requested Cathay Organisation to remove the tagline “Supporting the freedom to love” as it “may affect public sensitivities due to the issues at hand”.

And of course, there is the sorrowful, shameful fact that Section 377A remains in our statutes. As a society, we are signalling to the world and to our own people, that while we tolerate gay men in our society, we are not bold enough to redress a historical injustice of barbaric proportions. The stated promise to not prosecute anyone under 377A is not just cold comfort to gay men; it is in today’s world, an anachronistic affront to basic human rights.

Some people argue that the repeal of 377A will open the floodgates to legalising same-sex marriage, which they disapprove of. My honest response is that it may, and it may not, but that is simply not relevant. An analogy is that of slavery: did the abolition of slavery (which many 18th century white men agreed was overdue) lead eventually to universal suffrage (which many of the same men opposed)? The answer is maybe yes, maybe no; but the legalisation of slavery is so repugnant, as is the criminalisation of gay sex, that both must be abolished regardless of the social consequences.

I am personally inspired by how the Pink Dot movement has blossomed to become much more than a narrowly gay rights campaign. It has become the metaphor for inclusiveness, and the fact that young families with children chose to celebrate the ideal of an inclusive society with picnics and games on Hong Lim Green, gives hope to me as a senior citizen with a three-year-old grandson (and more on the way), that Singapore will Some Day set a shining example to a divided, hate-filled and fractious world that our vision of cohesive diversity can be real and thriving."

Signatory to online petition by Ready4Repeal[]

In September 2018, it was reported in the media that Ho was a signatory to a petition organised by Ready4Repeal to repeal Section 377A of the Penal Code which criminalised sex between men[3]. Other notable signatories were diplomat Tommy Koh and academic Kishore Mahbubani.

Views in biography[]

On Saturday, 27 July 2024, Aaron Low launched his book "Behind the Banyan Tree" in which he takes an in-depth look at the life and career of Ho, a long-time LGBT ally, expresses his joy over the repeal of Section 377A but inadvertently gets the year of its enactment by the British colonial authorities wrong - it was 1938 and not 1838. In 1838, sex between men was legal in Singapore because the British had not imported the Indian Penal Code and applied it to the Straits Settlements yet.

Yah Lah But podcast[]

Transcript:

"And the LGBT issue ah I'm I've never really been trying to grab in right a lot about it and so on but when Pink Dot asked me to write up comment I'm very happy to write it why should because this is a fundamental belief of mine ah fundamental belief of my parents my brother's gay perfectly lovely man so I'm expansion my own family and expense were friends and I do believe it is fundamentally wrong for someone to make life difficult for someone else simply because of your own personal beliefs and maybe that's because I grew up in Thailand which is a Buddhist society where are they did the tolerance for LGBT is really super deep rooted even among the super conservative military powers they will once also passed the same sex marriage because Buddhism really teaches you to be tolerant and is not just tolerant torrent means that somebody is deviant a new torrent of that deviancy but true tolerance means everybody's equal and you should not have the right to impose your views on someone else if that person is not hurting you you'll be you're pushing your view if you're from the Christian Right are you from the Muslim right or whatever it is it's know it's no but don't you have the right to to destroy the identity of someone else because of your religious beliefs and I've always believed and I wrote this in I'm a my articles I believe that the choice of your gender identity is a fundamental human right and I've also up well argued that I think this section oh what is it related so many yeah three seven seven a makes a mockery of the rule of law do you have something in the law was not in full view either enforcer or you repeal it near and well government has finally done something with it then to remove the problem for the next generation afford you need is which I think is good because this issue would become bigger and bigger but dumb my my hope view is that you have to stand up for something I don't protest in the streets for repeal of three seventy seven a I've always supported pink dot and I haven't gone simply because at my age I'm not putting clicking on crowds and so I don't go to a crowded movie theater I don't go but in my views are known and you have stand by your views you don't go and stand on a soapbox and beat your chest and give up your views as if you're a politician but if you don't stand for your views then who is gonna stand for their own views you get you get a vacuum then and a big danger is if you get a big vacuum than other people feel that vacuum and that's why I've always argued that a strong civil society is so important in Singapore if we want to be a cohesive and resilient society."

Our Grandfather Story interview[]

On 16 January 2025, Our Grandfather Story uploaded a video interview with Ho to its Facebook page[4]. During the chat, Ho gave his opinion on Singaporean parents not being able to let go of a sense of "face", quoting an anecdote of how his conservative father, and mother, felt about his gay brother.

Transcript: "The minute you are ashamed of a child because of of the shame they bring to you, it says that your ego is more important than your child's happiness. That's all it says. My father is very conservative, my brother is gay. My brother came out and my parents completely loved him for it. Right? So if you're ashamed of your child, it should never be because of face. You should be ashamed of your child because your child has done something that truly you find unacceptable."

References[]

Acknowledgements[]

This article was written by Roy Tan.

Ho Kwon Ping's views on LGBT rights

Contents